Do you support the postal workers

[H18sry]

http://91.207.221.86/message/showthread.php?p=2213030#post2213030 posts 144 and 145 :wink:

[Betty Boop]

Yes 100%, and the binmen. Modernisation = workers being shafted. Same with the council's modernising pay malarkey, that has been going on for the last three years, the workers are being shafted. In the words of Bad Martini, END OF! :greengrin

[Jay]

I'm voting yes because if the Royal Mail think the service I have been given over the last 2-3 years is acceptable then something has to be done - sounds like their way its going to get even worse.

Also both of my parents worked in the sorting office so I am aware of some of the management 'tactics'.

[puff the dragon]

No.

It's an unskilled job. There are currently 3 million unemployed in this country. Sack every striking postie as their jobs will be taken.

Industrial action died with the miners strike.

CWU leaders are Scargill wannabe tools trying to make a name for themselves and recreate the past.

[col02]

I feel I should vindicate my no answer. It is not I do not support the Postal workers it is more the Union I do not support. Not a fan of Unions in the slightest having worked my whole working life in the private sector I found it easy enough if I had a problem to approach someone in management about any problem I may have had.

[lyonhibs]

I'm going to cause apoplectic confusion with my answer, but here we go.

Looking at the evidence - biased though it is - presented on the main thread, I would say I am in favour of the strike if managment has reneged on the agreement signed in 2007 to the degree that they seem to have.

I am not, however, in favour of this casting of judgement upon the 30,000 (or 15,000 extra) temporary workers who have chosen to take up the opportunity of temporary employment to earn some money. They aren't morally or legally obliged to follow the strike of people they have never met before. Look after number 1 is - rightly in this instance IMO - their over-riding concern, and this DOES NOT make them "total ****bags" or acceptable target of verbal or physical intimidation.

[Beefster]

Nope, the days of holding the nation to ransom to get what you want should be long gone.

If the posties are that concerned about the company and its customers then they won't want the nation to suffer by having to pay for their £10bn pension deficit either.

As much as it pains me to say it, Mandelson is right. The Royal Mail staff are destroying their own company. Indirectly, they're also contributing to the defeat of Labour at the next General Election. Every cloud and all that.

I did like the bit "we're not asking for a pay rise per se" though. So what are you asking for? Less money? A pay freeze?

[ArabHibee]

Mon the posties!! :thumbsup:

[Flynn]

Nope, the days of holding the nation to ransom to get what you want should be long gone.


And so, it would seem, are the days of workers having the opportunity to stand up for their rights against the wrongdoings of unscrupulous corporations. I assume you would be perfectly happy to work longer hours for less or the same money?

:rolleyes:

[Killiehibbie]

Nope, the days of holding the nation to ransom to get what you want should be long gone.

If the posties are that concerned about the company and its customers then they won't want the nation to suffer by having to pay for their £10bn pension deficit either.

As much as it pains me to say it, Mandelson is right. The Royal Mail staff are destroying their own company. Indirectly, they're also contributing to the defeat of Labour at the next General Election. Every cloud and all that.

I did like the bit "we're not asking for a pay rise per se" though. So what are you asking for? Less money? A pay freeze?

So you would hold the Posties responsible for the actions of the shortsighted pension fund managers?

[Beefster]

And so, it would seem, are the days of workers having the opportunity to stand up for their rights against the wrongdoings of unscrupulous corporations. I assume you would be perfectly happy to work longer hours for less or the same money?

:rolleyes:

Again, I thought they were striking for the future of the company. Not one union official has mentioned 'more hours/less pay' in all the interviews that I've seen/heard.

A couple of people, including one ex-postie, seem to suggest on the other thread that it's an easy job with short hours. If that's the case, asking them to work their hours seems a reasonable thing to do.


So you would hold the Posties responsible for the actions of the shortsighted pension fund managers?

Not at all. Not every employee in Britain can damage the country quite so much and then expect the taxpayer to fund their pension deficit though.

[weecounty hibby]

[QUOTE=Flynn;2213682]And so, it would seem, are the days of workers having the opportunity to stand up for their rights against the wrongdoings of unscrupulous corporations. I assume you would be perfectly happy to work longer hours for less or the same money?

There are a lot of people in the private sector who have had to do just that this year. I know from my own experience.
All they are doing is jeopordising the entire future of the Royal Mail. Look at the companies who went tits up from the 70s because of unions going on strike at the drop of a hat. If I had my own business and needed to send parcels etc I would now be looking at another supplier of that service. Whether you like it or not modernisation takes place and always has done, if it hadnt we would all still be working on farms.

[blackpoolhibs]

Again, I thought they were striking for the future of the company. Not one union official has mentioned 'more hours/less pay' in all the interviews that I've seen/heard.

A couple of people, including one ex-postie, seem to suggest on the other thread that it's an easy job with short hours. If that's the case, asking them to work their hours seems a reasonable thing to do.



Not at all. Not every employee in Britain can damage the country quite so much and then expect the taxpayer to fund their pension deficit though.

I'd imagine thats me you are talking about? I have no idea what its like now, i have been left the post office some years now. Yes it was a cushy number, we only worked 4 and a half hours at most, but i do think its different now, but wonder how much?:confused:

[GlesgaeHibby]

I'm going to cause apoplectic confusion with my answer, but here we go.

Looking at the evidence - biased though it is - presented on the main thread, I would say I am in favour of the strike if managment has reneged on the agreement signed in 2007 to the degree that they seem to have.

I am not, however, in favour of this casting of judgement upon the 30,000 (or 15,000 extra) temporary workers who have chosen to take up the opportunity of temporary employment to earn some money. They aren't morally or legally obliged to follow the strike of people they have never met before. Look after number 1 is - rightly in this instance IMO - their over-riding concern, and this DOES NOT make them "total ****bags" or acceptable target of verbal or physical intimidation.

But is it right to profit out of the misfortune of the postal workers striking?

[weecounty hibby]

But is it right to profit out of the misfortune of the postal workers striking?

Where is the misfortune. The postal workers have chosen to take this action themselves. Misfortune would have been to sack/pay off these posties and then employ the temp staff.

[hibsdaft]

aye - firstly because i have bothered to read and listen to the Postal Workers grievances on working practices and conditions.

and secondly because i recognise that the posties and the CWU are defending a public orientated service and that their defence of the Royal Mail as we know it is in my personal interests.

read this earlier, quite a good summary:


Since coming to office, New Labour has done its best to destroy the Post Office as a highly productive public institution valued with affection by the British people. Not long ago, you posted a letter anywhere in the country and it reached its destination the following morning. There were two deliveries a day, and collections on Sundays. The best of Britain, which is ordinary life premised on a sense of community, could be found at a local post office, from the Highlands to the Pennines to the inner cities, where pensions, income support, child benefit and incapacity benefit were drawn, and the elderly, the awkward, the inarticulate and the harried were treated humanely.

At my local post office in south London, if an elderly person failed to turn up on pension day, he or she would get a visit from the postmistress, Smita Patel, often with groceries. She did this for almost 20 years until the government closed down this "lifeline of human contact", as the local Labour MP called it, along with more than 150 other local London branches. The Post Office executives who faced the anger of our community at a local church - unknown to us, the decision had already been taken - were not even aware that the Patels made a profit. What mattered was ideology; the branch had to go. Mention of public service brought puzzlement to their faces.

[lyonhibs]

But is it right to profit out of the misfortune of the postal workers striking?

This was a choice of theirs though - ok, I assume they feel that the inability of their Union and management to reach an agreement (for whatever reason) rather forced their hand, bit it was still technically a choice.

And secondly, 15,000 of these temporary posts are taken on by the Royal Mail at this time of year (or ok, possibly a bit later) anyway. So the extra 15,000 people are "profiting" from the situation in that they are taking up (legally) offered positions in order to get a few months wages that otherwise they wouldn't have had.

They are profiting, but not profiteering in the sense that I don't think the extra temp workers are rubbing their hands with glee at the fact that their posts are only available because posties are striking.

It's a tired old cliché, but money doesn't grow on trees, and if anyone - I know LH does - thinks they could genuinely turn down such a temporary role - especially in the current economic climate - purely through concerns about a need to show solidarity with the striking posties, then they are a better man than I am.

[lucky]

Support the CWU 100%.

It worries me greatly that workers attack unions. Unions are all about representing workers. I have never known a employer to give workers anything without a struggle.

In this particular dispute the management have set a course of action to antagonise its workforce into defending their jobs and ultimately the the Royal Mail. For those on here criticising the post workers try talking to your postie next time you see him/her and they will tell you they don't want to be on strike but have no choice. Its fight or die.

[HIBERNIALEITH]

I'm going to cause apoplectic confusion with my answer, but here we go.

Looking at the evidence - biased though it is - presented on the main thread, I would say I am in favour of the strike if managment has reneged on the agreement signed in 2007 to the degree that they seem to have.

I am not, however, in favour of this casting of judgement upon the 30,000 (or 15,000 extra) temporary workers who have chosen to take up the opportunity of temporary employment to earn some money. They aren't morally or legally obliged to follow the strike of people they have never met before. Look after number 1 is - rightly in this instance IMO - their over-riding concern, and this DOES NOT make them "total ****bags" or acceptable target of verbal or physical intimidation.

Yen what? Dry yer eyes! And stop sitting on the fence! You're either for it or against it! The temps working has nothing do with the fact they're wanting a proper working contractual! The temps will come, and they will go, as they do every year. The permanent employees just want a wee bit of stabilitiy!

Yes, we're all on the same boat, but for *****s sake, get over yourself! If they want to make a stance, let them!

[Gus]

I'm going to cause apoplectic confusion with my answer, but here we go.

Looking at the evidence - biased though it is - presented on the main thread, I would say I am in favour of the strike if managment has reneged on the agreement signed in 2007 to the degree that they seem to have.

I am not, however, in favour of this casting of judgement upon the 30,000 (or 15,000 extra) temporary workers who have chosen to take up the opportunity of temporary employment to earn some money. They aren't morally or legally obliged to follow the strike of people they have never met before. Look after number 1 is - rightly in this instance IMO - their over-riding concern, and this DOES NOT make them "total ****bags" or acceptable target of verbal or physical intimidation.


:top marks spot on IMO

[lyonhibs]

Yen what? Dry yer eyes! And stop sitting on the fence! You're either for it or against it! The temps working has nothing do with the fact they're wanting a proper working contractual! The temps will come, and they will go, as they do every year. The permanent employees just want a wee bit of stabilitiy!

Yes, we're all on the same boat, but for *****s sake, get over yourself! If they want to make a stance, let them!

I can assure you my eyes are entirely dry.

I'm relatively sure the post you quoted was pretty unequivocal - I support the Posties reason for striking (and explained why) but am against the wanton demonisation of the temporary workers (and I explained why)

If you think that in supporting the reasons for the strike going ahead I should automatically support this idea that the temporary workers are an army of ruthless Beezelbubs then I'm sorry to disappoint you.

[Jack]

For those who have voted NO I really cant see what else the Union can do, other than strike, if the talks with management have reached an impasse and the management refuse to go to ACAS for an independent review of the dispute.

By refusing to do this, to my mind, they must have something to hide and fear they would loose. If they had a strong case ACAS would back them.

I noticed Mandelson was very cute with his choice of words yesterday backing up management with this stance by say the dispute should be worked out within the Post Office i.e. without someone independent coming in and saying the workers cause is just.

[GlesgaeHibby]

Where is the misfortune. The postal workers have chosen to take this action themselves. Misfortune would have been to sack/pay off these posties and then employ the temp staff.

The misfortune is that the posties have been forced into strike action because they are being shafted left, right, and centre by the management. While they are out losing pay to fight for better working rights, people are coming in to work and undermining the strike.

[Betty Boop]

For those who have voted NO I really cant see what else the Union can do, other than strike, if the talks with management have reached an impasse and the management refuse to go to ACAS for an independent review of the dispute.

By refusing to do this, to my mind, they must have something to hide and fear they would loose. If they had a strong case ACAS would back them.

I noticed Mandelson was very cute with his choice of words yesterday backing up management with this stance by say the dispute should be worked out within the Post Office i.e. without someone independent coming in and saying the workers cause is just.

:agree: neither wonder Billy Hayes branded him "Minister without responsibility"!

[lyonhibs]

The misfortune is that the posties have been forced into strike action because they are being shafted left, right, and centre by the management. While they are out losing pay to fight for better working rights, people are coming in to work and undermining the strike.


Have you not rather changed your tune since yesterday?? The temporary workers shouldn't be vilified - IMO - for taking up temporary roles offered by the RM to try to keep some semblance of a postal service going during the strike - a strike which, like I say, I feel to be justified assuming the 2007 agreement is being treated like arse paper by RM Managment??

It's an ugly situation for the temps to be in, but I doubt many of them are skipping into work, high on the knowledge that the permanent posties are on strike and isn't it just great that they get to earn money as a result!!?? :confused:

Of course, if Unions and RM Managment would stop bickering in the press and releasing "Oh no we didn't" style accusations and counter accusations, then maybe it wouldn't have come to this.

[Beefster]

The misfortune is that the posties have been forced into strike action because they are being shafted left, right, and centre by the management. While they are out losing pay to fight for better working rights, people are coming in to work and undermining the strike.

Aye, it sounds hideous.

http://www.hibs.net/message/showpost.php?p=2213713&postcount=190

http://www.hibs.net/message/showpost.php?p=2212658&postcount=125

[archiebald]

Sounds like everybody is happy with the time the get there mail these days,im not. :grr:

[Green Mikey]

Sounds like everybody is happy with the time the get there mail these days,im not. :grr:

How have you come to this assumption?

The time I get my mail doesn't bother me as long it is before 5. I am at work 9 til 5 therefore it is always there when I arrive home at night.

[puff the dragon]

How have you come to this assumption?

The time I get my mail doesn't bother me as long it is before 5. I am at work 9 til 5 therefore it is always there when I arrive home at night.

want happened to the time when the 1st post was through your door by the time you'd scrubbed your baws?

[Green Mikey]

want happened to the time when the 1st post was through your door by the time you'd scrubbed your baws?

I have considerably smaller baws than you're average man, therefore it takes little to no time to scrub them. This unfortunate and tragically misunderstood personal affliction has meant that I have generally been absent from my abode when mail has been delivered thus lowering my expectations of what constitutes early delivery of mail.

[Beefster]

want happened to the time when the 1st post was through your door by the time you'd scrubbed your baws?

Your post was only delivered once a week? I hope it's more frequent nowadays. :wink:

[ginger_rice]

want happened to the time when the 1st post was through your door by the time you'd scrubbed your baws?

The Royal Mail management "modernised" the deliveries :grr:

[hibbykeef]

Royal Mail scrapped 2nd deliveries to improve the service,now 1st delivery arrives later than the old 2nd delivery. Simples:rolleyes:

[hibsdaft]

want happened to the time when the 1st post was through your door by the time you'd scrubbed your baws?

if you'd bothered to listen to them you'd realise that thats one of the reasons why the Posties are striking.

[ArabHibee]

Royal Mail scrapped 2nd deliveries to improve the service,now 1st delivery arrives later than the old 2nd delivery. Simples:rolleyes:

I believe that's actually incorrect. Royal Mail scrapped the first delivery, not the second, and that's why you never receive your mail before 9am.

[Steve-O]

How have you come to this assumption?

The time I get my mail doesn't bother me as long it is before 5. I am at work 9 til 5 therefore it is always there when I arrive home at night.

I remember when mail arrived about 7.30am.

[Pete]

I remember when mail arrived about 7.30am.

I remember when mail arrived.

[Onceinawhile]

Yes but no.

The royal mail is a cumbersome beast that needs to modernise to become competitive in order to become less of a burden to the state, numerous companies could do the job better for less (e.g. tnt.) It also annoys me just how much free time the posties get (from working in the bookies I know for a fact it is over two to three hours a day).

However to lose that many jobs would be horrible for the economy and just cannot happen without other job creation, maybe during an economic boom but certainly not whilst we are enduring a recession. This debate really boils down to how much of a free market you want IMO.

[Woody1985]

Can any of the posties answer this.

I sent a recorded delievery letter on Wednesday 21st at 17:15 (the postie took my letter whilst I was in the shop).

I paid a company £270 for a service which turned out to be ***** when I received the paperwork through. I had a 14 day cancellation period where I can get my money back. The 14 days started from 15.10.2009 meaning I have until 29.10.2009 for them to receive my letter.

Was recorded delivery part of the overall strike action as I think that there are ocassions when certain things are still delivered (could be wrong)?

Do you think that they will receive my letter prior to 29.10?

I can't afford to lose my £270!

Cheers.

[Sumner]

Mon the Posties!

With slight increases in postal charges extra finance could be shared
to help postal efficiency, but instead the working practices (as usual)
and day-to-say SERVICE these guys deliver gets mucked about with
by management - who KNOW it's unrealistic and unfair.

I've seen it in 2 industries to date, don't call it "modernisation"
when it's really setting breakneck / unrealistic goals or targets
then penalising the workforce struggling to deliver the undeliverable.

In summation, 99% of management everywhere are a shower of *******s.

[H18sry]

Can any of the posties answer this.

I sent a recorded delievery letter on Wednesday 21st at 17:15 (the postie took my letter whilst I was in the shop).

I paid a company £270 for a service which turned out to be ***** when I received the paperwork through. I had a 14 day cancellation period where I can get my money back. The 14 days started from 15.10.2009 meaning I have until 29.10.2009 for them to receive my letter.

Was recorded delivery part of the overall strike action as I think that there are ocassions when certain things are still delivered (could be wrong)?

Do you think that they will receive my letter prior to 29.10?

I can't afford to lose my £270!

Cheers.

Registered post is the only postal service that is guaranteed, you should be okay but to make sure you should have paid the extra couple of quid :cool2:

[Woody1985]

Registered post is the only postal service that is guaranteed, you should be okay but to make sure you should have paid the extra couple of quid :cool2:

Is registered post not recorded delivery?

[Steve-O]

Yes but no.

The royal mail is a cumbersome beast that needs to modernise to become competitive in order to become less of a burden to the state, numerous companies could do the job better for less (e.g. tnt.) It also annoys me just how much free time the posties get (from working in the bookies I know for a fact it is over two to three hours a day).

However to lose that many jobs would be horrible for the economy and just cannot happen without other job creation, maybe during an economic boom but certainly not whilst we are enduring a recession. This debate really boils down to how much of a free market you want IMO.

How do you know they've not finished their shifts or working split shifts etc?

[hibsdaft]

Yes but no.

The royal mail is a cumbersome beast that needs to modernise to become competitive in order to become less of a burden to the state, numerous companies could do the job better for less (e.g. tnt.)

have you read the posties argument Antwerphibs? you sound like Peter Mandelson there!
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n18/maya01_.html

for the record the CWU have agreed to modernisation plans and the RM has just made a profit despite the game being stacked against them (TNT unlike the RM can pick and choose what areas they provide their service to). not a fair comparison at all.

[ArabHibee]

Is registered post not recorded delivery?

Nope. The majority of people think it is but it isn't. Recorded Delivery is basically what the name suggests. The letter or package will be signed for when it is delivered so you will know that the item was delivered as there is proof of delivery by way of signature. It should be by first class post but that doesn't guarantee delivery within a couple of days.

If you want to guarantee delivery you need to use 'Special Delivery' or guaranteed next day delivery. A lot more expensive but definitely worth it if you want the peace of mind that it will be delivered the following day and will be signed for.

However, I believe that Guaranteed Delivery are not being guaranteed during strike action.

[Woody1985]

Nope. The majority of people think it is but it isn't. Recorded Delivery is basically what the name suggests. The letter or package will be signed for when it is delivered so you will know that the item was delivered as there is proof of delivery by way of signature. It should be by first class post but that doesn't guarantee delivery within a couple of days.

If you want to guarantee delivery you need to use 'Special Delivery' or guaranteed next day delivery. A lot more expensive but definitely worth it if you want the peace of mind that it will be delivered the following day and will be signed for.

However, I believe that Guaranteed Delivery are not being guaranteed during strike action.

F*************************K

Get back to work ya bunch of *******s. :greengrin

This *******in company are going to wriggle out of giving me my money back by saying they never received notification within 14 days. They're a bunch of sleekit *****. They said they couldn't progress with my application unless I paid them an amount to get it going and then I got the pack that said I could pay it after returning the documentation.

****ing *****. :grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr:

[ArabHibee]

F*************************K

Get back to work ya bunch of *******s. :greengrin

This *******in company are going to wriggle out of giving me my money back by saying they never received notification within 14 days. They're a bunch of sleekit *****. They said they couldn't progress with my application unless I paid them an amount to get it going and then I got the pack that said I could pay it after returning the documentation.

****ing *****. :grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr::grr:

There should be a tracker number on your receipt for the recorded delivery letter. You can either phone a number or go onto the website to see if it has been delivered or not.

I think you should be ok, presuming that it's not been lost in the backlog........................................... .

[Woody1985]

There should be a tracker number on your receipt for the recorded delivery letter. You can either phone a number or go onto the website to see if it has been delivered or not.

I think you should be ok, presuming that it's not been lost in the backlog........................................... .

I've just realised that the receipt is at my exes (who chucked me out earlier with all my stuff). :grr::grr::grr:

Fingers crossed now with the looks of it!

[Removed]

I've just realised that the receipt is at my exes (who chucked me out earlier with all my stuff). :grr::grr::grr:

Fingers crossed now with the looks of it!

I didn't want to post on this thread until now...................



:faf: :faf: :faf: :faf: :faf: :faf:

[Woody1985]

I didn't want to post on this thread until now...................


:faf: :faf: :faf: :faf: :faf: :faf:

I'd laught to if I wasn't dependant on getting this cash back but she's a little spiteful **** and will probably chuck it out just to piss me off. :greengrin

[ArabHibee]

I've just realised that the receipt is at my exes (who chucked me out earlier with all my stuff). :grr::grr::grr:

Fingers crossed now with the looks of it!

Deary me!! :greengrin

Can I perhaps suggest some flowers from a late night garage and some chocs to win her over?

Might get you back in the door to find your receipt and once you've got it, you can tell her to GTF!!

Just an idea........................

[Woody1985]

Deary me!! :greengrin

Can I perhaps suggest some flowers from a late night garage and some chocs to win her over?

Might get you back in the door to find your receipt and once you've got it, you can tell her to GTF!!

Just an idea........................

**** her. I had to spend a tenner on getting a taxi back to my ma's wi my stuff. :faf:

Wouldny gie her the steam off ma pish.

[ArabHibee]

**** her. I had to spend a tenner on getting a taxi back to my ma's wi my stuff. :faf:

Wouldny gie her the steam off ma pish.


Ah well. Depends how much you wanna see that 270 bucks again.:wink:

[zeetelee]

I use Royal Mail on average twice a week and not once has any item that I have posted or been waiting for not arrived I even get a cheery good morning from the postie if I see him. For me it is a reliable and cheap service in the main. As for the strike I have a few Postal worker mates who dont want to part of it but feel their hands are tied. My opinion is if they are getting shafted over pensions and working conditions then good luck to them. The working man in this country is in the poor minority in the eyes of the government in my opinion.So if by going on strike they can secure their future thats ok by me.:agree:

[Woody1985]

Ah well. Depends how much you wanna see that 270 bucks again.:wink:

There's a quote in a film, I think it might be A Bronx Tale where a guy is due the main boy 20 bucks from a loan he gave him. And rather than kick the boys ass, Sonny (the boss) says to him, look at it this way, you've paid the ****ing ****bag 20 bucks never to see him again and get him out of your life.

270 is a bit much but I kind of like the sentiment. :faf:

[ArabHibee]

There's a quote in a film, I think it might be A Bronx Tale where a guy is due the main boy 20 bucks from a loan he gave him. And rather than kick the boys ass, Sonny (the boss) says to him, look at it this way, you've paid the ****ing ****bag 20 bucks never to see him again and get him out of your life.

270 is a bit much but I kind of like the sentiment. :faf:

Give it a couple of weeks, you'll be back in her loving arms.

I'd put money on it. :greengrin